Expression Profiles of Genes in Toll-Like Receptor-Mediated Signaling of Broilers Infected with <i>Clostridium perfringens</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toll-like receptors (TLRs) participate in detecting microbial pattern molecules for activation of the host immune response. We investigated possible roles of TLRs in the chicken response to Clostridium perfringens infection by examining the expression of TLR genes and other genes involved in TLR-mediated signaling within the spleens and ilea of C. perfringens-challenged broilers. Upregulation of a tumor necrosis factor alpha-inducing factor homolog in challenged chickens compared to naïve chickens was observed, regardless of the incidence of necrotic enteritis. In addition, the members of the TLR2 subfamily were found to be most strongly involved in the host response to C. perfringens challenge, although the expression of TLR4 and TLR7 was also upregulated in spleen tissues. While the combination of TLR1.2, TLR2.1, and TLR15 appeared to play a major role in the splenic response, the expression of TLR2.2 and TLR1.1 was positively correlated to the expression of adaptor molecules MyD88, TRAF6, TRIF, and receptor interacting protein 1 in the ileal tissues, demonstrating a dynamic spatial and temporal innate host response to C. perfringens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".